ACEVEDO
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

M.D. Fla. | 2025-06-03
No. 8:23-cv-2801
2025 FFL 14278 District Court, M.D. Florida (2025)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court granted the unopposed motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff Denise Acevedo, having prevailed in her Social Security disability benefits claim, moved for attorney's fees under the EAJA. The Commissione…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

The plaintiff Denise Acevedo moves unopposed for an award of $9,000.00 in attorney's fees as the prevailing party under the Equal Access of Justice Act (the “EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Doc. 26. Acevedo filed a complaint and opening brief seeking judicial review of the Commissioner's denial of her claim for Social Security Disability benefits. Docs. 1, 16. The Commissioner filed a brief in opposition. Doc. 20. I reversed the Commissioner's final decision and remanded the case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings, and the Clerk entered a judgement in favor of Acevedo and against the Commissioner. Docs. 23–24.

As the prevailing party, Acevedo timely [fn 1] moves unopposed for an award of attorney's fees and costs under the EAJA. See 28 U.S.C. § 2414(d)(1)(A); cf. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 300–02 (1993) (concluding that a party who wins a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party), superseded by rule on other grounds, FED. R. CIV. P. 58(c)(2)(B). Included in her requested total are paralegal fees, which are also compensable under the EAJA. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(a)(1) & (d)(1)(A); Richlin Sec. Serv. Co. v. Chertoff, 553 U.S. 571, 590 (2008) (“[W]e hold that a prevailing party that satisfies EAJA's other requirements may recover its paralegal fees from the Government at prevailing market rates.”). Although the total fees exceed $10,0000, Acevedo agrees to compromise her claim for $9,000. Doc. 26 at 3.

The Commissioner consents to the requested relief. Doc. 26 ¶ 6. Therefore, for the reasons stated by Acevedo, the unopposed motion for attorney's fees under the EAJA, Doc. 26, is GRANTED. Acevedo shall receive $9,000.00 in attorney's fees under the EAJA. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Acevedo owes a federal debt, the defendant must pay the fees to Acevedo's counsel in accord with Acevedo's assignment of fees. [fn 2] See Doc. 26-1.

ORDERED on this 3rd day of June, 2025.

LINDSAY S. GRIFFIN United States Magistrate Judge

[fn 1]: The plaintiff in a social security case has thirty days beyond the sixty-day appeal window to apply for fees and other expenses under the EAJA, for a total of ninety days after judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B), (d)(2)(G); FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(B). Here, Acevedo timely filed her application for fees on May 20, 2025, Doc. 32, within ninety days after judgment. See FED. R. CIV. P. 6(a)(1)(C).

[fn 2]: After an order awarding EAJA fees, the United States Department of the Treasury determines whether a plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If the plaintiff has such pre-existing debt, the Government may use the fee award to offset that debt. See Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 592–93 (2010) (“A § 2412(d)(1)(A) attorney's fees award is payable to the litigant and is therefore subject to an offset to satisfy the litigant's pre-existing debt to the Government.”).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw